Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Education theorists have proposed a number of pedagogies to approach queerness/transness, including queer pedagogy and queer inclusion . Theorists of queer pedagogy continue to construct it as a transgressive, risky, impossible pedagogy and they are clear that it is somewhat distinct from—and, to some extent, in tension with—queer inclusion. In language education, distinct pedagogical discourses of queer pedagogy/inquiry and queer inclusion are also evident. However, some recent work in our field describing an “inclusive queer pedagogy” appears to conflate the two approaches. In this article, we critically consider the implications of this “inclusive queer pedagogy,” arguing that it leads to pedagogy that is inconsistent with how queer pedagogy is imagined and enacted across the wider fields of education, and risks leaving normative regimes largely untroubled, including cisheteronormativity, but also oppressive norms within queer/trans communities. Appreciating the distinct aims of queer pedagogy and queer inclusion, we share a pedagogical framework in which both, now untangled, can be intertwined under productive tension to realize language education that affirms marginalized communities and identities while also challenging normative power.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Biel et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: